RATLAM AHINSA SHIKSHA SAMITI,RATLAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) , BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed accordingly and the Id

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Charitable Trust, Mumbai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ITAT No. 5111/Mum/2024, order dated 29.11.2024: "6. The assessee in terms of the above provisions first applied for a provisional approval under sub-clause (B) of clause (iv) of first proviso to subsection (5) of section 80G

SANAND NYAS,INDORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshisanand Nyas Cit(Exemption) 417 Trade House, 14/3 Bhopal बनाम/ South Tukoganj, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aacts5253M Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 19.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2025

charitable activities before seeking provisional approval under Clause (iv) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act would ever be entitled to grant of final registration under Clause (iii) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act even after grant of provisional approval, which would make the relevant provisions of section 80G(5) otiose and defeat

AATMA PRAKASH MENTAL HEALTH FOUNDATION,INDORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaatma Prakash Mental Cit (Exemption), Health Foundation, Bhopal बनाम/ 738, Nehru Nagar, Vs. Indore. (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Aaoca9170A Assessee By Shri Apurva Mehta & Shri Rajesh Mehta, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 16.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.05.2024

80G(5) of the Act stating that “whichever is earlier” is applicable only to the newly constructed trust. The findings of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga Charitable Trust (supra) is reproduced below: “10.1 In this background, we need to read the sub-clause (iii) of the Proviso to Section

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable trust as mentioned in section 115BBC (2) of the Act and hence provisions of sub-section (1) of the section 115BBC of the Act are squarely applicable in the case of the assessee as in case of the assessee, anonymous donations as per section 115BBC(3) has been found. 4.40 Without any prejudice to the above, it is also

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable trust as mentioned in section 115BBC (2) of the Act and hence provisions of sub-section (1) of the section 115BBC of the Act are squarely applicable in the case of the assessee as in case of the assessee, anonymous donations as per section 115BBC(3) has been found. 4.40 Without any prejudice to the above, it is also

SHRIDHAR GYAN PRASAR PARMARTHIK TRUST, RAJGAD,RAJGAD vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, assessee’s appeal in 9

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Shri Shridhar Gyan Prasar Parmarthik Trust Rajgad Pan :Aafts0410D : Appellant

charitable purpose. The AR though relied upon some case laws relating to the condition mentioned at section 80G(5)(iii), which is not being invoked in this case. 4. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee trust

M/S. RISHIRAJ K.M.B. EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. THE CIT, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: Na

charitable or religious purposes during the previous year in which such services are so provided and shall be chargeable to income tax notwithstanding the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 11.] Explanation- for the purposes of this sub-section, the expression “value” shall be the value of any benefit or facility granted or provided free of cost

BALAJI GAU SANRAKSHAN SANSTHAN,VIDISHA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

section 80G and have provided appropriate relief to the assessees by adopting a pragmatic approach: (a) ITAT Mumbai in Rambha Charitable Trust

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN,CHULGIRI BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

charitable and the trust continues to be eligible for registration under section 12A. Principle of consistency is also in favour of the assessee as based on the amended objects renewal of approval under section 80G

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN,BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

charitable and the trust continues to be eligible for registration under section 12A. Principle of consistency is also in favour of the assessee as based on the amended objects renewal of approval under section 80G

WAKEUP FOUNDATION,INDORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the grounds of

Bench: Shri Paresh M. Joshi & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.895 & 898/Ind/2024 (Hybrid Hearing) Wakeup Foundation, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), 41/411, Jangampura, South Bhopal Rajmohalla, Mp - 452002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaaw9534A (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 12AB and 80G of the Act. Considering the fact that the application of assessee was not considered on merit, we deem it appropriate to direct the CIT(E) to treat the application of assessee on merit and pass the order in accordance with law. Under similar circumstances, the Co-ordinate Benches of ITAT and Hon’ble Orissa High Court

WAKEUP FOUNDATION,INDORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the grounds of

Bench: Shri Paresh M. Joshi & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.895 & 898/Ind/2024 (Hybrid Hearing) Wakeup Foundation, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), 41/411, Jangampura, South Bhopal Rajmohalla, Mp - 452002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaaw9534A (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 12AB and 80G of the Act. Considering the fact that the application of assessee was not considered on merit, we deem it appropriate to direct the CIT(E) to treat the application of assessee on merit and pass the order in accordance with law. Under similar circumstances, the Co-ordinate Benches of ITAT and Hon’ble Orissa High Court

M/S MAYANK BIDASRIA MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,INDORE vs. THE CIT-E, INDORE

In the result, both the appeal of assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Trust. It is not the case where the assessee is giving scholarship based upon same merit. It is also not the case where the assessee is promoting and sponsoring the students belonging to poor and weaker sections of the society. In absence of material to substantiate the activity being charitable the grounds raised in the present appeal are dismissed

M/S MAYANK BIDASRIA MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,INDORE vs. THE CIT(E), BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeal of assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Trust. It is not the case where the assessee is giving scholarship based upon same merit. It is also not the case where the assessee is promoting and sponsoring the students belonging to poor and weaker sections of the society. In absence of material to substantiate the activity being charitable the grounds raised in the present appeal are dismissed

M/S. BHANDARI GROUP OF HOSPITALS & INSTITUTIONS,INDORE vs. THE CIT - I, INDORE

In the result, both the appeal of assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

charitable or religious purposes in terms of the deed of trust. vii. Complying with all other provisions as required under the income tax or any other law. The assessee Company has complied with all the above listed requirements and has not breached the trust entrusted by the Act Bhandari Group of Hospital & Institutions and the Central Government while granting registration

M/S. BHANDARI GROUP OF HOSPITALS & INSTITUTIONS,INDORE vs. THE CIT - I, INDORE

In the result, both the appeal of assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

charitable or religious purposes in terms of the deed of trust. vii. Complying with all other provisions as required under the income tax or any other law. The assessee Company has complied with all the above listed requirements and has not breached the trust entrusted by the Act Bhandari Group of Hospital & Institutions and the Central Government while granting registration

SETH PANNALALJI DHOOL CHANDJKI KATARIA PARMATHIK TRUST,INDORE vs. THEM CIT (EXEMPTION ), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniseth Paannalalji Cit, Exemption Dhoolchandji Kataria Bhopal Parmarthik Trust, बनाम/ 10-13, Industrial Area, Vs. Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aafts 2492 D Assessee By Shri Rajesh Mehta & C.A. Kaide Kangsawala Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.05.2023

Trust Act. It was also registered by Income-tax Department u/s 12A as well as section 80G of Income-tax Act, 1961, w.e.f. 10.01.2003. However, in terms of the amendments made in Income-tax Act, 1961, it is required to obtain re-registration u/s 12A as well as 80G. Therefore, to comply with such requirements, the assessee filed two separate

SOM DISTILLERIES PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-1(1), BHOPAL

Appeals are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Charitable Trust 79800 M.P. Nagar Vyapari Utsav Samiti 2100 AIM for Seva 18000 TOTAL 441500 8. Ld. AR prayed that these donations even if not allowable u/s 37(1), the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s 80G of the Act. Therefore, he made a limited prayer to remand this issue to AO for giving deduction u/s 80G after factual verification